Carbon footprint analysis in the aquaculture industry: Assessment of an ecological shrimp farm

Carbon footprint (kg CO2e) expended in the aquaculture: Assessment of concrete pond rainbow trout farming from Türkiye

“…When the protein and calorie retention rates of aquatic and farm animals species by Fry et al (2018) and the carbon emissions (kg CO2 / 100 kcal) associated with food production reported by Chang et al (2017) were compared; seen that the species with high protein and calorie retention rates have low carbon emissions. When these reports (Chang et al 2017;Fry et al 2018;Boyd et al 2020) and the results of the present study for the total CF expended, CF expended per Mcal of cultural energy expended during production, and CF expended per 100 kcal food energy in harvested fish were taken together, CPRT farming can be considered as sustainable production. In terms of the effects of climate change on sectorial growth in ensuring food safety in the aquaculture industry (Cubillo et al 2021), it has become an inevitable reality that aquaculture will affect the carbon footprint.…”

“…Considering the regression analysis (y = -0,0002428x + 0,2029332 R² = 0,9344) of these three-year production values, CF expended per 100 kcal food energy in harvested fish value of the APC was determined as 0.1173 (Table 5). The carbon footprint analysis was based on (Chang et al 2017)'s shrimp farm life cycle assessment; our results were the CF expended value per Mcal of cultural energy expended during production, in other words, kg CO2e expended against each Mcal cultural energy expenditure during the production period. When the kg CO2e kg -1 meat CF of the aquacultured fish and other farm animals as described in the report by (Boyd 2013), and the carbon emissions related to producing various foods (kg CO2 / 100 kcal) as described in the report by Chang et al (2017) were examined; the status of aquaculture is correlated with the results of our analysis of total CO2e expended (CF for per kg live-weight gain or CF expended for per kg harvested fish) and CF expended per 100 kcal food energy in harvested fish.…”

“…The carbon footprint analysis was based on (Chang et al 2017)'s shrimp farm life cycle assessment; our results were the CF expended value per Mcal of cultural energy expended during production, in other words, kg CO2e expended against each Mcal cultural energy expenditure during the production period. When the kg CO2e kg -1 meat CF of the aquacultured fish and other farm animals as described in the report by (Boyd 2013), and the carbon emissions related to producing various foods (kg CO2 / 100 kcal) as described in the report by Chang et al (2017) were examined; the status of aquaculture is correlated with the results of our analysis of total CO2e expended (CF for per kg live-weight gain or CF expended for per kg harvested fish) and CF expended per 100 kcal food energy in harvested fish. When the protein and calorie retention rates of aquatic and farm animals species by Fry et al (2018) and the carbon emissions (kg CO2 / 100 kcal) associated with food production reported by Chang et al (2017) were compared; seen that the species with high protein and calorie retention rates have low carbon emissions.…”

“…When the kg CO2e kg -1 meat CF of the aquacultured fish and other farm animals as described in the report by (Boyd 2013), and the carbon emissions related to producing various foods (kg CO2 / 100 kcal) as described in the report by Chang et al (2017) were examined; the status of aquaculture is correlated with the results of our analysis of total CO2e expended (CF for per kg live-weight gain or CF expended for per kg harvested fish) and CF expended per 100 kcal food energy in harvested fish. When the protein and calorie retention rates of aquatic and farm animals species by Fry et al (2018) and the carbon emissions (kg CO2 / 100 kcal) associated with food production reported by Chang et al (2017) were compared; seen that the species with high protein and calorie retention rates have low carbon emissions. When these reports (Chang et al 2017;Fry et al 2018;Boyd et al 2020) and the results of the present study for the total CF expended, CF expended per Mcal of cultural energy expended during production, and CF expended per 100 kcal food energy in harvested fish were taken together, CPRT farming can be considered as sustainable production.…”

Biofloc technology : Practical aspects of carbohydrate supplementation

“…In farming systems relying on heavy aeration, nonrenewable electricity use contributes close to 30% of CO2 emissions, followed by 24% due to feeding. In addition, additive use (22%), waste and pollution control (15%) and processing, storage and transport, (8%), are the major contributors to GHG emissions (Chang et al, 2017).…”